Dear Editor:

I think Becky Herman made some useful observations about some of Larry Pratt’s statements, but I’d like to look at Ms. Herman’s suggestion that businesses who support the McLachlan recall effort may be alienating their customers. Is it the view of McLachlan supporters that only one opinion is worthy of consideration? I believe that’s the attitude many Colorado Democrats have chosen as their preferred approach to government. Karl Marx and Joe Stalin embraced that philosophy.

Mike McLachlan came to Pagosa and told us he is a strong supporter of the Constitution. He went to Denver, then Durango, where he told the League of Women Voters meeting, “… the government may infringe, take away, or completely reduce that right.” I’m aware of two or three people who share McLachlan’s apparent poor opinion of the Constitution; but I suspect most of those who voted for him do not believe the Constitution should be so easily disregarded. McLachlan told us that nearly all the constituents who contacted him are opposed to his votes on the gun rights measures, yet he voted to ignore their wishes.

Some may believe that the Fields/McLachlan gun control laws are necessary, “to do something,” even if they have no bearing whatsoever on stopping future occurrences like Columbine, Aurora or Newtown; but do they also believe they should be represented by a man who has rejected his oath to uphold the Constitution and who has rejected the preferences of his electorate?

George Washington said, “The power under the Constitution will always be in the people. It is entrusted for certain defined purposes, and for a certain limited period, to representatives of their own choosing; and whenever it is executed contrary to their wishes, their servants can, and undoubtedly will, be recalled.”

Bill Bechtold

This story was posted on April 25, 2013.